2009
DOI: 10.1186/1479-5876-7-81
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A comparison of classification methods for predicting Chronic Fatigue Syndrome based on genetic data

Abstract: Background: In the studies of genomics, it is essential to select a small number of genes that are more significant than the others for the association studies of disease susceptibility. In this work, our goal was to compare computational tools with and without feature selection for predicting chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) using genetic factors such as single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
84
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(84 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
84
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[3] Discusses techniques that could be employed for feature selection and classification. [4], [5] Discusses the performance of three families of classification algorithms and also brings out the facts that the size of the sample and quality of data play a major role in determining the accuracy. Recent research reveals that deep learning algorithms facilitate modeling high level abstraction [9].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[3] Discusses techniques that could be employed for feature selection and classification. [4], [5] Discusses the performance of three families of classification algorithms and also brings out the facts that the size of the sample and quality of data play a major role in determining the accuracy. Recent research reveals that deep learning algorithms facilitate modeling high level abstraction [9].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4,5 In addition, we used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology and calculated the area under the ROC curve (AUC). 13,17 Most researchers have now adopted AUC for evaluating predictive ability of classifiers owing to the fact that AUC is a better performance metric than accuracy. 19 The AUC of…”
Section: Evaluation Of the Predictive Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…17 First, the whole dataset was randomly divided into 10 distinct parts. Second, the model was trained by nine-tenths of the data and tested by the remaining tenth of data to estimate the predictive performance.…”
Section: Evaluation Of the Predictive Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Lung-Cheng Huang reported that Naïve Bayesian classifier produces high performance than SVM and C 4.5 for the CDC Chronic fatigue syndrome dataset [14]. Paul R Harper [12] reported that there is not necessary a single best classification tool but instead the best performing algorithm will depend on the features of the dataset to be analyzed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%